ArticleJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
Article in Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of demineralization around orthodontic brackets bonded with different adhesive agents on fatigue-based shear bond strength: an in vitro comparative study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Enamel Surface Integrity and Pulpal Temperature in Debonding Metallic Brackets: A Study of Two Intensity Levels of Diode Laser Versus Conventional Method.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Single-component adhesives do not require the application of a primer on the enamel surface that has been etched and has been reported to have acceptable shear bond strengths on Aim: This split-mouth study aimed to examine and assess the rates of bracket bond failure of hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)-based (Aqualine LC) and bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (BisGMA)-based (Orthofix SPA) single-component adhesives used to bond orthodontic brackets over 6 months. Materials and Methods: This Results: The overall bracket bond failure rate (BFR) with single-component adhesives was 6.02%. Bracket BFRs of HEMA-based and BisGMA-based adhesives were 4.16% and 7.8%, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant ( Conclusion: Bond failures were more in brackets bonded with BisGMA-based adhesive (Orthofix SPA) compared with HEMA-based adhesive (Aqualine LC). Bond failures were less in the maxillary arch.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.